Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Rohan Sukumaran
dblp:280/0377
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
2since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 2 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Efficient and distributed learning · 67% Trustworthy machine learning · 33% | |
| Network and information security
1 paper |
Privacy and data protection · 100% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
fairness |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Balancing Act: Constraining Disparate Impact in Sparse Models · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
model compression |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Balancing Act: Constraining Disparate Impact in Sparse Models · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › model compression
pruning |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Balancing Act: Constraining Disparate Impact in Sparse Models · ICLR 2024 |
Privacy and data protection
inference attack |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | SIMBA: Split Inference - Mechanisms, Benchmarks and Attacks · ECCV (76) 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
split inference · 0.8model pruning · 0.8constrained optimization · 0.8
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | SIMBA: Split Inference - Mechanisms, Benchmarks and Attacks
Abhishek Singh 0005, Vivek Sharma 0001, Rohan Sukumaran, John Mose, Jeffrey Chiu, Justin Yu, Ramesh Raskar |
ECCV (76) | 3 |
| 2024 | Balancing Act: Constraining Disparate Impact in Sparse ModelsabstractModel pruning is a popular approach to enable the deployment of large deep learning models on edge devices with restricted computational or storage capacities. Although sparse models achieve performance comparable to that of their dense counterparts at the level of the entire dataset, they exhibit high accuracy drops for some data sub-groups. Existing methods to mitigate this disparate impact induced by pruning (i) rely on surrogate metrics that address the problem indirectly and have limited interpretability; or (ii) scale poorly with the number of protected sub-groups in terms of computational cost. We propose a constrained optimization approach that _directly addresses the disparate impact of pruning_: our formulation bounds the accuracy change between the dense and sparse models, for each sub-group. This choice of constraints provides an interpretable success criterion to determine if a pruned model achieves acceptable disparity levels. Experimental results demonstrate that our technique scales reliably to problems involving large models and hundreds of protected sub-groups. Meraj Hashemizadeh, Juan Ramirez, Rohan Sukumaran, Golnoosh Farnadi, Simon Lacoste-Julien, Jose Gallego-Posada |
ICLR | 3 |